Arkansas passes the Idaho Stop and Oregon is thinking about it

In April, Arkansas became the 2nd state in the US to pass a true Idaho Stop law that allows cyclists to treat stop signs as yield signs and stop lights as stop signs (one guess who was first). Delaware passed a "stop-as-yield" law in 2017 that allows cyclist to treat stop signs as yield signs as have a few towns and counties in Colorado, but Arkansas went Full Idaho making them 2nd. 

I'm surprised it was Arkansas. Serious efforts have been made in Oregon, California, Arizona and even here in DC, but Arkansas just went and did it (and by overwhelming margins). That means the two states that have passed it are both red states. Go figure. 

The new law was first recommended by the Governor’s Advisory Council on Cycling. It was later sponsored by Sen. Missy Irvin (R-Mountain View) and Rep. Jay Richardson (D-Fort Smith). Irvin called the new law “a win for everyone in the state.”

"This will also allow for better traffic flow in our cities as cyclists will no longer need to hold up traffic at the lights or stop signs. Cars and trucks won’t be stuck behind them as they start moving and will be better able to make the next timed light.”

Meanwhile, Oregon's legislature is considering stop-as-yield again. It passed one committee vote in the senate, but is held up in the Rules Committee. As usual some people are opposed to it because they believe it is unsafe or makes cyclists unpredictable. This is the 3rd time the bill has come up in Oregon and Jonathan Maus of BikePortland thinks there is now less freaking out. 

An Idaho Stop bill in Utah passed the house this year, but then failed in the senate.

And there was another type of success in Quebec, where cyclists were granted the right to cross intersections on the pedestrian walk signal rather than wait for the traffic light to turn green, just like here in DC. 

Comments

[Crickey]

It's passing in places where they don't consider bikes to be a viable transportation mode. This fits in with my thesis of the Idaho Stop: it's only acceptable if you think the modal share of bikes is so low that it frankly doesn't matter what they do. Here, what we need is dooring laws and more infra. The Idaho Stop here is a distraction combined with a mockable target for cycling opponents.

[ACyclistInThePortCIty]

Delaware it pretty much is viable, I think. And certainly Oregon. Also not sure that its a distraction - I see most biking advocates focusing on infra and on legal issues other than the Idaho stop or Delaware yield.

[huskerdont]

Being able to legally do what almost all cyclists do anyway is far from a distraction.

Dooring laws are great, but they simply give us legal cover after we've been doored. A dooring law will change the behavior of 0% to 1% of people regarding dooring.

[washcycle]

We have dooring laws in DC. Good ones.